Hi Malcolm One of the records appears to be some kind of transcript. The source of the record shown as image no.17 is, as you said, 5D94/1/7/3, but the source for image no.2 is 5D94/1/1/5. It adds to the confusion that 5D94 is, I believe, the old reference number for Bingley, whereas WYAS now refer to it as BDP7. Anyway, a list of Bingley registers they sent me in 2008 showed BDP7/1/1/5 as the Register of Baptisms 1779-1792 and Burials 1775-1792; and BDP7/1/7/3 under Transcripts, covering 1768-1780, which are said to be incomplete. It looks as though Ancestry have included the images of both of these, but mixed them up together by year. It's not totally clear what these transcripts are, as they appear to be written in a bound book. Bishops Transcripts would usually be written on loose pages so they could be handed or sent in each year, so it's probably not these - and in any case, Bingley BTs, like most Yorkshire ones, are at the Borthwick in York rather than WYAS. At this distance we can probably only guess, but perhaps the less tidy one (described by WYAS as a transcript) was written out by the vicar at the time of the ceremonies, and then copied more neatly by the clerk in the proper register. This would account for the handwriting being different, and if we assume some of the rough copies got lost, that would explain why the transcripts are incomplete. I hope this helps - maybe for a definitive answer you'd need to ask WYAS themselves. Arthur PS - Do you by any chance have a spare Ellen/Eleanor EMMOTT in that area? John STOW married one such in Kildwick in 1786; she was born about 1768, and I and many other Stow researchers have never been able to find a birth or baptism for her. (She's not the one baptised in Skipton in 1769.) On 27/06/2012 14:21, Malcolm Emmett wrote: > I have just found what appear ro be two separate records for the baptism of > James Emmott in Bingley in 1779. It actually looks as if there were two > parish registers. One seems to be written more legibly than the other! > Would they have kept two copies or is there another explanation that I am > missing?